I wasn't angry with your post I am ticked that a JM (your choice of words is spot on) clone is now SOS and in this case SOS may end up being very appropriate. I haven't necessarily disliked any of his appointments until now, in this case I dislike it and I dislike the promotion being granted as a result of the appointment. I wonder if the liberals will remember it was bho who brought this woman to prominence or will they go after Trump, I expect we both know the answer to that, either way a piss poor choice for both posts.

I should also clarify, it's not what she's done in the past that bothers me, it's that I think the CIA needs non CIA leadership. I thought Panetta was a good choice and I thought (by and large and in comparison to others) he did a pretty good job ftmp he kept politics out of the CIA and that is a good thing.

Hold on while I make a chart

Those aren't contradictory statements. Both emphasize the need to stand up to Putin and both express doubt that President Trump will do so. The first statement expresses concern on whether Tillerson will be able to stand up to Putin, based on his past. The second expresses displeasure that Tillerson was fired because he did in fact stand up to Putin.

What's missing from the second statement is an acknowledgement that any initial concern about Tillerson not standing up to Putin was unfounded and that he deserves due credit. Nevertheless, the statements themselves are not contradictory.

We don't need no edgeukashun

Those aren't contradictory statements. Both emphasize the need to stand up to Putin and both express doubt that President Trump will do so. The first statement expresses concern on whether Tillerson will be able to stand up to Putin, based on his past. The second expresses displeasure that Tillerson was fired because he did in fact stand up to Putin.

What's missing from the second statement is an acknowledgement that any initial concern about Tillerson not standing up to Putin was unfounded and that he deserves due credit. Nevertheless, the statements themselves are not contradictory.

Bookface/Instagran legend

Those aren't contradictory statements. Both emphasize the need to stand up to Putin and both express doubt that President Trump will do so. The first statement expresses concern on whether Tillerson will be able to stand up to Putin, based on his past. The second expresses displeasure that Tillerson was fired because he did in fact stand up to Putin.

What's missing from the second statement is an acknowledgement that any initial concern about Tillerson not standing up to Putin was unfounded and that he deserves due credit. Nevertheless, the statements themselves are not contradictory.

Yea, right, "expressed concern."
Claims of "fawning over Putin" and "cozy relationship with the Kremlin" are not raising concern, they are an attempt at a hatchet job.

In other words, when Congresswoman Pelosi makes a statement complaining about a presidential appointment based on pure partisanship and not on any objective facts, disregard it. When she makes a second statement in which any honorable person would have admitted that she harshly criticized a person without proper justification, disregard it even further.

Amazing that someone with such inability to judge outcomes has been able to enrich herself to become a multimillionaire all while on a government salary.

Legendary Cowboy

Yea, right, "expressed concern."
Claims of "fawning over Putin" and "cozy relationship with the Kremlin" are not raising concern, they are an attempt at a hatchet job.

In other words, when Congresswoman Pelosi makes a statement complaining about a presidential appointment based on pure partisanship and not on any objective facts, disregard it. When she makes a second statement in which any honorable person would have admitted that she harshly criticized a person without proper justification, disregard it even further.

Amazing that someone with such inability to judge outcomes has been able to enrich herself to become a multimillionaire all while on a government salary.

Take a look at the PA 18 results. A district Trump won by 20+ points in the POTUS election. They held a special election last night for an empty state house seat. The Democrat out raised the Republican by a margin of 3:1 and as of right now the Democrat Lamb has won the election by a vote of 113,813 to 113,186.

How did a Democrat "win" (pending recount) this district that is heavily GOP? Even after Trump appeared and stumped for the GOP candidate and Trump Jr made a trip to stump for the GOP candidate as well.

The Democrat Lamb ran far away from Pelosi and her lot and distance himself from Pelosi and her lot and aligned himself as a Democrat who was slightly Right leaning.

Democrats are finding success by running away from and distancing themselves from the Way to far left Pelosi and her crew. The DNC needs to take note and get her the hell out of DC. She is an embarrassment

Find safe haven in a warm bathtub full of my jazz.

Take a look at the PA 18 results. A district Trump won by 20+ points in the POTUS election. They held a special election last night for an empty state house seat. The Democrat out raised the Republican by a margin of 3:1 and as of right now the Democrat Lamb has won the election by a vote of 113,813 to 113,186.

How did a Democrat "win" (pending recount) this district that is heavily GOP? Even after Trump appeared and stumped for the GOP candidate and Trump Jr made a trip to stump for the GOP candidate as well.

The Democrat Lamb ran far away from Pelosi and her lot and distance himself from Pelosi and her lot and aligned himself as a Democrat who was slightly Right leaning.

Democrats are finding success by running away from and distancing themselves from the Way to far left Pelosi and her crew. The DNC needs to take note and get her the hell out of DC. She is an embarrassment

We don't need no edgeukashun

Take a look at the PA 18 results. A district Trump won by 20+ points in the POTUS election. They held a special election last night for an empty state house seat. The Democrat out raised the Republican by a margin of 3:1 and as of right now the Democrat Lamb has won the election by a vote of 113,813 to 113,186.

How did a Democrat "win" (pending recount) this district that is heavily GOP? Even after Trump appeared and stumped for the GOP candidate and Trump Jr made a trip to stump for the GOP candidate as well.

The Democrat Lamb ran far away from Pelosi and her lot and distance himself from Pelosi and her lot and aligned himself as a Democrat who was slightly Right leaning.

Democrats are finding success by running away from and distancing themselves from the Way to far left Pelosi and her crew. The DNC needs to take note and get her the hell out of DC. She is an embarrassment

Oh I don’t know how did the democrats possibly, win this seat.
Outside money, ran as a pro gun, anti abortion, anti Pelosi higher federal spending democrat. Iow, ran as a Republican using democrat outside money, if, this result holds it will be interesting to see if the leopard changes spots once in DC.
300% outspend winning by 800 votes out of 220k the democrats really wanted that seat but unless all their rich uncles die they don’t have enough money to go around. I guess with the Clintons around it’s actually possible all the democrat rich uncles die

Legendary Cowboy

Oh I don’t know how did the democrats possibly, win this seat.
Outside money, ran as a pro gun, anti abortion, anti Pelosi higher federal spending democrat. Iow, ran as a Republican using democrat outside money, if, this result holds it will be interesting to see if the leopard changes spots once in DC.

This is a state house position, not DC....Why Trump and Trump Jr saw a need to get involved with it the way they did I have no clue. He is a former Marine and basically ran as a Centrist Catholic, pro life, pro Union,pro gun, pro govt sponsored training programs, Pro Obamacare, Protecting Medicare and Social Security, Pro Student Loan Debt forgiveness, Pro Modern Energy, Pro Law Enforcement, Pro Govt Back infrastructure spending, Pro Environment and anti marijuana

Joshua 1:9

Those aren't contradictory statements. Both emphasize the need to stand up to Putin and both express doubt that President Trump will do so. The first statement expresses concern on whether Tillerson will be able to stand up to Putin, based on his past. The second expresses displeasure that Tillerson was fired because he did in fact stand up to Putin.

What's missing from the second statement is an acknowledgement that any initial concern about Tillerson not standing up to Putin was unfounded and that he deserves due credit. Nevertheless, the statements themselves are not contradictory.

We don't need no edgeukashun

This is a state house position, not DC....Why Trump and Trump Jr saw a need to get involved with it the way they did I have no clue. He is a former Marine and basically ran as a Centrist Catholic, pro life, pro Union,pro gun, pro govt sponsored training programs, Pro Obamacare, Protecting Medicare and Social Security, Pro Student Loan Debt forgiveness, Pro Modern Energy, Pro Law Enforcement, Pro Govt Back infrastructure spending, Pro Environment and anti marijuana

Agreed, I was actually not aware that it was a state house seat so thanks for the info, however.
He still is winning by roughly 800 votes out of 220k cast, he is running for a seat where the republican incumbent became toxic, he outspent the r by 300%, he ran as anti abortion (but understands it's legal), anti strict gun control, and by spending money that nobody has and yet still has a lead of what roughly 1/3 of 1%.
Like I said he ran as a republican or a democrat trying to woo republican voters and is still clinging to a slight lead. If it holds it will still be interesting for that district to see if he is what he says or if he is what the democrats want him to be.
There was substantial outside money poured into this race and most of it was democratic unless the democrats plan on outspending the republicans by 200% or more in every contested seat this actually doesn't bode all that well for midterms regardless of what the msm is trying to claim.

Legendary Cowboy

Agreed, I was actually not aware that it was a state house seat so thanks for the info, however.
He still is winning by roughly 800 votes out of 220k cast, he is running for a seat where the republican incumbent became toxic, he outspent the r by 300%, he ran as anti abortion (but understands it's legal), anti strict gun control, and by spending money that nobody has and yet still has a lead of what roughly 1/3 of 1%.
Like I said he ran as a republican or a democrat trying to woo republican voters and is still clinging to a slight lead. If it holds it will still be interesting for that district to see if he is what he says or if he is what the democrats want him to be.
There was substantial outside money poured into this race and most of it was democratic unless the democrats plan on outspending the republicans by 200% or more in every contested seat this actually doesn't bode all that well for midterms regardless of what the msm is trying to claim.

I have to check the numbers as what I've read and seen isn't matching up to what you are saying. Per FEC filings in the election. Outside independent expenditures toward the campaign were $10.7 million for the GOP candidate and $2.6 million for the Democratic candidate..almost 80% of the outside money in the election went toward the GOP candidate

Now inside the district the Democrat raised $3.9 million and spent $3.1 million and the Republican raised $600,000 and spent $615,000.

We don't need no edgeukashun

I have to check the numbers as what I've read and seen isn't matching up to what you are saying. Per FEC filings in the election. Outside independent expenditures toward the campaign were $10.7 million for the GOP candidate and $2.6 million for the Democratic candidate..almost 80% of the outside money in the election went toward the GOP candidate

Now inside the district the Democrat raised $3.9 million and spent $3.1 million and the Republican raised $600,000 and spent $615,000.

But with Democrat Conor Lamb outspending Republican Rick Saccone by more than a 3-to-1 margin — remember, campaigns get discounted ad rates compared with outside groups — the gap in broadcast spots aired is much smaller: 4,240 for the GOP, 3,242 for the Democrats.
I also heard that the guy that this is replacing is/was the primary reason the rep's could lose the seat not that the dem candidate was all that attractive but he was something different than what they thought they had.

Most of what I post is what I've read sometimes what I hear either in conversation or the radio, usually while driving, not what I search on the web for that's why I use qualifiers not absolutes, I heard this on the radio but since you needed affirmation this is what I found.

Legendary Cowboy

But with Democrat Conor Lamb outspending Republican Rick Saccone by more than a 3-to-1 margin — remember, campaigns get discounted ad rates compared with outside groups — the gap in broadcast spots aired is much smaller: 4,240 for the GOP, 3,242 for the Democrats.

Most of what I post is what I've read or heard, usually while driving, not what I search on the web for that's why I use qualifiers not absolutes, I heard this on the radio but since you needed affirmation this is what I found.

Ahh so local in district money the Dem outspent the GOP at a 3:1 rate because he out raised him at a 3:1 rate locally. That makes sense. Outside money in the race was for the GOP but the local money was on the Dem.

I'm betting there was a local big wig Dem in his district some where that funneled the money in somehow